memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Category talk:Studio executives
Studio executives sub cat (From MA:CS) While they are in Trek-lore not the most popular people, including with me (though I've to begrudgingly admit that it was not all woe and mayhem regarding their role, as I've discovered there were some "good" ones amongst them), I'd like to propose a "Category:Studio executives" sub-cat under Category:Production. Of the five execs of which articles are already written by other contributors, three are categorized as "Producers", but producers and execs are different beasties all-together. As overhead and studio oversight execs are formally not involved with the actual production (which is the purview of the producers, the top one btw, always selected by execs), virtually never credited and therefore not to be sub-catted under Category:Production staff as the two other ones are, even though they have considerable decision-making influence during the conceptualization phase before production starts. An important aspect which is the purview of the execs (often overlooked by lore) is the marketing of Star Trek, aside from the fact that it is they who decide if we see Star Trek on-screen at all. As you can see here, five articles were already written, but already a dozen "redlinks" await entries...On a side-note, I'd like to point out that they should not be confused with "Network executives", those of NBC in particular (and who where the ones most vigorously pushing for cancellation of TOS), though of these no articles or redlinks are yet featured on the site as far as I can ascertain.--Sennim (talk) 11:08, December 19, 2014 (UTC) :While I'm not 100% convinced that we need articles about all of these executives at the top of the chain (and especially not the network executives, etc), if people feel that these articles are worth while and relevant, then I'm OK with the category suggestion. -- sulfur (talk) 11:14, December 19, 2014 (UTC) Well, that's why I've only included the execs whose names I came across repeatedly (discounting the fringe ones, the financial "suits" in particular) in Trek reference books and therefore think pertinent. The TMP executive quartet for example, were the most involved due to that movie's troublesome production history, Katzenberg especially. It was the absolute "top-dog", Bluhdorn (as CEO, founder and main shareholder of Gulf+Western actually the de facto owner of the Trek-franchise during 1967-1983 in the first place), who initiated the movie franchise as well as the accompanying tie-in Trek book-line and ordained the continuation of it after TMP was finished even though the TMP Paramount quartet did not seek continuation and wanted to be rid of Star Trek alltogether. On the other hand, Solow (one of the "good" guys btw) mentioned that his successor on TOS, Douglas Cramer, had few dealings with Trek, not wanting to be burned by it as the series' fate was pondered by the powers that be. Most ironically however, he is the one exec, besides Solow, who actually has an official "Executive in Charge of Production" credit; Go figure...:)--Sennim (talk) 11:42, December 19, 2014 (UTC) ::Support. If we're going to have pages on them, it's better to have them properly categorized. - 06:36, February 15, 2015 (UTC) ::Support. Tom (talk) 20:02, March 8, 2015 (UTC) :Category created. Tom (talk) 18:49, March 13, 2015 (UTC)